1 / 2 2026:CGHC:820 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 1686 of 2025 Smt. Mangala Sharma W/o Shri B.P. Sharma Aged About 69 Years Retired Superintendent, Social Welfare Department, (C.G.), R/o A-1, Police Station - City, Khub Chand Baghel Ward 67, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus Shri Bhuvnesh Yadav (I.A.S.) Presently Posted As Secretary, Department Of Social Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Sandeep Dubey, Advocate For respondent : Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 07/01/2026 1. This contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 12 of the contempt of Courts Act read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India alleging the willful disobedience of the order dated 23.04.2025 passed by this Court in writ petition bearing WPC No. 496 of 2020 wherein this Court has issued a direction to convene review DPC as on 22.11.2007 to consider the case of petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Director/Deputy Director, Panchayat and Social Welfare Department. 2 / 2 2. Learned counsel for respondent submits that pursuant to the direction issued by this Court an affidavit has been filed along with which the proceedings of the review DPC conducted on 29.11.2025 has also been filed. He submits that upon consideration petitioner was not found fit for promotion. Copy of the proceedings of review DPC has been placed on record. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that according to the provisions of law, if review DPC is to be conducted as on 22.11.2007, previous five years ACR’s are to be considered and respondents have not considered those five year’s ACR’s but have considered earlier ACR’s which were not relevant. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the documents placed on record. 5. The direction of this Court is to conduct DPC which the respondent has already conducted and if, the petitioner is aggrieved with the proceedings, nature of proceedings which was conducted by respondents then, petitioner will have some other remedy. 6. In the opinion of this Court, respondent has complied with the direction issued by this Court in the order dated 23.04.2025 and therefore, I do not find to continue this contempt petition. Accordingly, this contempt proceeding is dropped. 7. Notice issued to respondent stands discharged. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Alfiza